Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
So Men Can Read Maps Better
47 Answers
A study, confirming what most of us know already, has found men and women are wired differently.
Now I know this will upset the right-on brigade, especially the feminist ones, but before you fire off a 'Attack YMB post' the study goes on to say women can multi task better, so each sex has pro's.
Maybe this is why women are statistically safer drivers. Of course the great EU ignores this and has clobbered women with higher insurance. will they change their minds in the light of evidence or should playing the right-on card take precedence over fact?
It certainly does put paid the the 'men and women are the same' rhetoric though.
Now I know this will upset the right-on brigade, especially the feminist ones, but before you fire off a 'Attack YMB post' the study goes on to say women can multi task better, so each sex has pro's.
Maybe this is why women are statistically safer drivers. Of course the great EU ignores this and has clobbered women with higher insurance. will they change their minds in the light of evidence or should playing the right-on card take precedence over fact?
It certainly does put paid the the 'men and women are the same' rhetoric though.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Agree with lg totally. That's exactly what i said on the other thread. If you think this'll upset "feminists", it's only because you think male skills are more important than female ones. Women (and it's a generalisation, of course) are also better at reading people, teaching/training and managing people. All useful in any business and we risk missing out on these if we expect women to behave like men.
So, in summary, no-one is particularly surprised by this, and all those people typically characterised as the "right-on brigade" aren't that bothered. Radical feminists with some crazy attempt to make equality in this context mean something it cannot, or even those very rare few who seem determined to just invert sexism, are the only ones bothered. And there aren't any of those here, I hope.
Equality of opportunity is what it's about.
Equality of opportunity is what it's about.
"It certainly does put paid the the 'men and women are the same' rhetoric though."
I think the 'rhetoric' that you refer to is:
"men and women are equal", not 'the same'.
For instance, men have penises not vaginas, men have to shave their faces, and woman are able to carry babies...because they have wombs and men don't.
I can't think of anyone who would seriously argue that men and women are 'the same'.
I think the 'rhetoric' that you refer to is:
"men and women are equal", not 'the same'.
For instance, men have penises not vaginas, men have to shave their faces, and woman are able to carry babies...because they have wombs and men don't.
I can't think of anyone who would seriously argue that men and women are 'the same'.
That's how a lot of people see "equality", though, sp. Especially in work. It's as if men are genuinely superior, but for the sake of equality, we'll let women do the same jobs, but expect them not to be as good. It's unfair, inefficient and patronising, but happens constantly - that women are judged on men's standards.
If you want to become a lifeguard you have to take a course and pass a series of tests. Some of these tests are physical and are performed against the clock. Don't do any one of them in the time allowed - you fail. It's exactly the same tests for everybody: young or old, man or woman. You simply have to achieve the (one) required standard. That's what I call equality. It's all the jobs that preach the equality mantra but in reality have slightly different criteria for the two sexes that cause hackles to be raised. Like firefighters for instance. Either you can carry someone down a ladder or you can't. I know which one I'd prefer to see coming up the ladder.
browntrout
But that's assuming that's all firemen do.
There isn't one job called 'Fireman' - and in any case, I can't see any special provision given to women here:
http://
And practically speaking, in the 30 odd years since women have entered the Fire Service, I can't think of a single occasion where a woman has been sent up a ladder to rescue a trapped victim - and dropped him/her.
But that's assuming that's all firemen do.
There isn't one job called 'Fireman' - and in any case, I can't see any special provision given to women here:
http://
And practically speaking, in the 30 odd years since women have entered the Fire Service, I can't think of a single occasion where a woman has been sent up a ladder to rescue a trapped victim - and dropped him/her.
SP1814,
When the government of the day wanted to see more women in the service the entry test/requirements were changed. For instance, they dropped having to be able to extend a 100KG ladder by yourself in 20 seconds. The beep test (ever increasingly fast running whilst carrying weights) was also dropped. Carrying a 12 stone person 100 yards in under a minute also dropped. I could go on but you can see what I mean. By changing the "rules" to accommodate women they ended up with tests that men who were previously not up to it were now able to pass as well. So the overall effect has been to reduce the standard of physical fitness/strength required. Fair enough if that's what people really want. But is it.
When the government of the day wanted to see more women in the service the entry test/requirements were changed. For instance, they dropped having to be able to extend a 100KG ladder by yourself in 20 seconds. The beep test (ever increasingly fast running whilst carrying weights) was also dropped. Carrying a 12 stone person 100 yards in under a minute also dropped. I could go on but you can see what I mean. By changing the "rules" to accommodate women they ended up with tests that men who were previously not up to it were now able to pass as well. So the overall effect has been to reduce the standard of physical fitness/strength required. Fair enough if that's what people really want. But is it.
Getting back to the map-reading, why does it drive lordalex (and most other men of my acquaintance) nuts when I turn the map round to navigate.
It is impossible for me to tell whether a turn is right or left if we're going top to bottom.
M ind you, I have my own navigational difficulties. i'm fine with a map but without get lost within a couple of streets of my home.
Thank goodness for satNav...when lordalex can be persuaded to turn it on.
Puzzled why the map turning bothers them so much, though....
It is impossible for me to tell whether a turn is right or left if we're going top to bottom.
M ind you, I have my own navigational difficulties. i'm fine with a map but without get lost within a couple of streets of my home.
Thank goodness for satNav...when lordalex can be persuaded to turn it on.
Puzzled why the map turning bothers them so much, though....
Hmmm...I take your point, but I wonder if in practical terms, this has actually had a detrimental impact on the effectiveness of the fire service operationally.
For instance, if on a squad of seven fire officers, one was a woman who was unable to physically carry a 13 stone person down a building, wouldn't practicality kick in (ie. managing the crew, planning, and actually fighting the fire).
With the old rules in place, the service was excluding a whole skillset that could be open to them.
An alternative perspective...
When I was growing up, female door staff were unheard of. Now, when I'm in Soho, I see loads of places that employ female bouncers, not because they're big and tough, but because they (generalisation alert) have great negotiation skills and despite recent news stories - most blokes, even when drunk, will think twice about starting a fight with a female bouncer.
For instance, if on a squad of seven fire officers, one was a woman who was unable to physically carry a 13 stone person down a building, wouldn't practicality kick in (ie. managing the crew, planning, and actually fighting the fire).
With the old rules in place, the service was excluding a whole skillset that could be open to them.
An alternative perspective...
When I was growing up, female door staff were unheard of. Now, when I'm in Soho, I see loads of places that employ female bouncers, not because they're big and tough, but because they (generalisation alert) have great negotiation skills and despite recent news stories - most blokes, even when drunk, will think twice about starting a fight with a female bouncer.
ladyalex
Take this with a huge pinch of salt - but I remember reading a newspaper story based on research which claimed that biologically, men have better spatial reasoning than women because we blokes had to use that skill when hunting bison or whatever.
The report claimed that's why men are also better at reverse parking and have greater levels of aggression.
Although I doubt that last point is true...especially if you've witnessed a group of women descending on the shoe department of Selfridges on day one of the sales...
Take this with a huge pinch of salt - but I remember reading a newspaper story based on research which claimed that biologically, men have better spatial reasoning than women because we blokes had to use that skill when hunting bison or whatever.
The report claimed that's why men are also better at reverse parking and have greater levels of aggression.
Although I doubt that last point is true...especially if you've witnessed a group of women descending on the shoe department of Selfridges on day one of the sales...
ladyalex
Blimey!
Found it...!
http://
Blimey!
Found it...!
http://
Lol. Men do have better spatial awareness.
When it comes to firefighting (generalisations with a biological basis).
men have more physical strength (younger ones, anyway)
women are better at assessing risks.
take your pick. There are very few jobs now where physical strength is an actual requirement. I'm a carer and regularly move a 16 stone man. We just have equipment. It doesn't do men any good to be carrying another human, either.
When it comes to firefighting (generalisations with a biological basis).
men have more physical strength (younger ones, anyway)
women are better at assessing risks.
take your pick. There are very few jobs now where physical strength is an actual requirement. I'm a carer and regularly move a 16 stone man. We just have equipment. It doesn't do men any good to be carrying another human, either.
It's hard to get the lifting gear up a ladder.
All members of an emergency team should be able to do whatever is required to be done.
Female bouncers are certainly a good idea. But as you say they are not employed for their fighting abilities.
I don't really see all this as a sexual equality thing. Just part of the remorseless dumbing down of everything. Standards are gradually lowered but spin doctors keep telling us things are getting better.
It's things like Police Officers no longer have to be able to swim that get me. I wonder how many people have drowned as a result of that change.
All members of an emergency team should be able to do whatever is required to be done.
Female bouncers are certainly a good idea. But as you say they are not employed for their fighting abilities.
I don't really see all this as a sexual equality thing. Just part of the remorseless dumbing down of everything. Standards are gradually lowered but spin doctors keep telling us things are getting better.
It's things like Police Officers no longer have to be able to swim that get me. I wonder how many people have drowned as a result of that change.
Latest Posts
Editor's Blog11 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles11 mins ago
Society & Culture16 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles21 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.